Pakistan’s Parliament has voted to grant new powers to the country’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, while simultaneously providing him with lifelong immunity from arrest and prosecution. Critics argue that this move significantly widens the path toward authoritarianism in the country.
According to reports by the BBC, the legislation was formalized on Thursday with the signing of the 27th Amendment to Pakistan’s Constitution. The amendment also introduces notable changes to the country’s top court management system.
Proponents of the amendment argue that the decision provides the armed forces with an administrative framework and helps reduce case backlogs in the courts. Pakistan’s military, a nuclear-armed institution, has historically played a central role in the nation’s politics, sometimes seizing power through coups and at other times exercising influence behind the scenes.
Throughout Pakistan’s history, military leaders like General Pervez Musharraf and General Zia-ul-Haq have repeatedly brought the country into periods of political instability through their overt control. Analysts often describe the balance of power between the civilian and military sectors as a hybrid governance system. Many now view the latest constitutional amendment as tipping that balance in favor of the military.
Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington, described the amendment as perhaps “the strongest indication yet” of this shift. He said Pakistan is no longer experiencing a hybrid system but is moving into a “post-hybrid” system, where civilian-military relations are increasingly unbalanced.
Under the latest constitutional change, Munir, who has served as army chief since November 2022, will also oversee the Navy and Air Force. His rank of Field Marshal and associated privileges are now permanent, and he will continue to perform duties even after retirement, upon the president’s recommendation. This effectively ensures that Munir will retain a significant public role for life. Supporters argue that the amendment clarifies the military command structure.
According to Pakistan’s government-run news agency, Associated Press of Pakistan, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stated that the changes will allow Pakistan’s defense system to align with the requirements of modern warfare, forming part of a broader reform agenda. Critics, however, see it as a transfer of power to the military.
“There is no balance between the military and civilian population,” said Muniza Jahangir, journalist and vice-chair of Pakistan’s Human Rights Commission. She noted that instead of curbing the military’s influence, the amendment has further empowered it at a time when restraint was needed.
Limited Independence for Judiciary
Another controversial aspect of the amendment concerns the judiciary. The law establishes a new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) to decide constitutional matters. The president will appoint its chief justice and judges.
Jahangir warned that this permanently changes the nature of the right to fair trial, stating that the executive now has influence not just over judicial appointments but also over the composition of constitutional benches. “When the state determines the composition of these benches, what hope does a litigant have for impartial justice?” she asked.
Journalist and commentator Arifa Noor also expressed concerns, saying the judiciary now appears largely subordinate to the executive, with little independence to function effectively. Previously, the Supreme Court heard and decided constitutional cases, which helped manage criminal and civil case backlogs. Separating these functions, supporters argue, allows smoother judicial processes.
However, Karachi-based lawyer Salahuddin Ahmed criticized the move, noting that most pending cases in Pakistan are not in the Supreme Court. “If the goal were truly speedy case resolution, reforms would have focused on those cases,” he said.
Within hours of the amendment’s signing, two Supreme Court judges submitted resignations. Justice Athar Minallah stated in his resignation letter, “The Constitution I swore to uphold is no longer intact.” Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said the amendment had dismantled the Supreme Court and placed the judiciary under government control.
Defense Minister Khawaja Asif claimed that the resignations were prompted by the judges’ realization that the amendment attempted to assert parliamentary supremacy over the court.
Judges can now be transferred to other courts without consent. If they refuse, they can appeal to the Judicial Commission, but if refusal is deemed unlawful, the judge must retire. Supporters argue that the change ensures personnel deployment across all courts, but critics fear it could be used as a tool of intimidation. Salahuddin Ahmed warned that forced transfers could pressure judges to comply with government decisions, potentially destabilizing Pakistan’s balance of power.
“Our judiciary has historically cooperated with authoritarian rulers but sometimes pushed back,” he said. “Removing that hope entirely risks pushing them toward an even more dangerous path.”
Kugelman also noted that the amendment is not a positive sign for social stability, indicating a drift toward authoritarianism. The latest 27th Amendment builds upon last year’s 26th Amendment, which gave lawmakers the authority to select Pakistan’s top judges, and speculation is already circulating about a potential 28th Amendment.
